11 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

If writers are going to give a nod to the past, at least they should make a nominal effort to research it.

At this moment, there are big arguments happening on SM about the correct level of handsomeness required for Mr. Darcy in Pride & Prejudice and the correct level of ugliness required for Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre. This is because of new adaptations coming out soon.

There are those making fun of both discussions...but these are actually VERY important character details in the respective books. They matter to the story and reveal a lot about their protagonists.

And don't even get me started on the newest adaptation of Wuthering Heights...

The point is:

DETAILS MATTER.

The fact that we're still upset about how they messed around with GL history almost 20 years after it went off the air shows how important they are.

Lee Lawson at about 8 minutes. A shame they never let her have any of this type of verve as Bea as it would make sense for Nola's mother.

WNEW Commercials - April 23, 1968 (+ highlights from The New Yorkers) - YouTube

11 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

Lee Lawson at about 8 minutes. A shame they never let her have any of this type of verve as Bea as it would make sense for Nola's mother.

WNEW Commercials - April 23, 1968 (+ highlights from The New Yorkers) - YouTube

Make me want some Compoz. I guess this is before quaaludes took off.

6 hours ago, Reverend Ruthledge said:

Thanks for the explanation of how the name came to be. I didn't know she was named by Cassie. It still seems odd to me to name her that of all names.

I found the scene where Danny and Michelle agree to keep Hope's name as is. The explanation feels a bit flat. I actually felt more for Cassie.

Starts at 30:04.